Jon,
The OM-PC was my first SLR and my first Olympus camera, so maybe I am a
bit biased. I like it a lot. I did have one fairly major problem with
it, however. It started eating batteries shortly after I got it. It
was fixed (I think that they had to replace the circuit board) and it
has worked great since then (about 5 years).
A few reasons that I like the OM-PC more then my OM-2n:
1) The LEDs in the viewfinder are easier to see in low light levels
then my OM-2n.
2) It weighs a fair bit less then my OM-2n.
3) I like the rubber texture and grip, I think that it is easier to
hold then my OM-2n without a winder.
4) ISO 25-3200 instead of 12-1600 is a bit more usefull to me.
5) The window in the back makes it easy to see if you have film loaded
or not, and if so, what kind it is.
6) It doesn't use those flimsy Accessory Shoes, the hot shoe isn't
going to crack or wobble.
7) The mirror prefires when using the self timer, which my OM-2n
doesn't do. This is probably the biggest advantage.
I don't ever use the program mode, or DX ISO auto set. I do use the
ESP metering to alert me of difficult lighting situations if I get too
casual and forget to check the range of illumination in a scene. If
the ESP light goes on, I'll carefully check the scene and then decide
what I want to do in Manual mode.
About the only thing that I like about the OM-2n more is that the Bulb
setting is truly mechanical, while the OM-PC isn't. That and the fact
that it needed a major overhaul. Since then the batteries seem to last
forever, though.
Just my opinion,
Marten
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|